Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

henri don't be ignorant - the phone operator LOGGED THE INITIAL CALL AT 3:33am AND THEN THE CALLER DROPPED THE PHONE BUT DID NOT DISCONNECT AND CAME BACK TO THE PHONE AT 3:35am. That is 2 minutes. Read the testimony of the TRIAL.

This website includes the trial testimony of Jeff MacDonald about the phone call, which is somehow being stopped from being copied. There is no mention at all about two minutes:

I'm not hung up on the two minutes. As I said, you don't even need to get to that level of detail to show that inmate is guilty by his own words.

The timeline, in its entirety, shows just how basically impossible it would be for "intruders" to:
1) manage to arrive at almost exactly the moment MacD "fell asleep", already well after 2AM (anything else is far too late)
2) to (barely) "knock out" inmate, giving him one non-life-threatening injury, then proceed to absolutely butcher an innocent woman and two very little girls
3) don a pair of gloves (such meticulous drug-crazed "intruders"!)
4) write "PIG" -- WHY WHY WHY?? -- on the headboard
5) wipe off all-but-one of the weapons -- WHY WHY WHY??
6) drop the cleaned-off weapons in the backyard -- WHY WHY WHY??
Re #5 & #6:
If the "intruders" are in a rush to leave -- and presumably they are, as MacD is about to "wake up"(!) -- why not just take the weapons, which would be much faster? And if you're going to leave them, why bother wiping them off, which will take a lot more time?

Seriously, good grief, how can anyone still believe this ridiculous narrative? But it's the ONLY way inmate's story could be true.

I'm not hung up on the two minutes. As I said, you don't even need to get to that level of detail to show that inmate is guilty by his own words.

<snip of the ridiculous narrative>

Seriously, good grief, how can anyone still believe this ridiculous narrative? But it's the ONLY way inmate's story could be true.

But Scott, you forgot the best part: this supposedly drug-hungry mob (since there had to be at least six of them if there are four in the living room and two with Colette - mac has always said Colette screamed about 'they') did not steal anything from the house, bypassing the hoard of drugs & medical syringes mac had stolen and lied about destroying.

And the California AG's office sent out an advisory to all California LEA's that Gunderson as a private investigator was without credibility and they would not act on or support prosecutions utilizing information or materials provided by him.

In all my years I'm aware of only one other individual that made it to that level of unreliability - Scott Tracy Barnes.

__________________"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Ted commented on numerous high-profile cases, often--if not always--taking a minority or deeply implausible view, always benefitting form his professional past, never disadvantaged by the sheer number of unlikely or outright impossible conspiracies he subscribed to, never left any the poorer for any instances in which he was grievously and demonstrably entirely wrong."

I'm not hung up on the two minutes. As I said, you don't even need to get to that level of detail to show that inmate is guilty by his own words.

If the "intruders" are in a rush to leave -- and presumably they are, as MacD is about to "wake up"(!) -- why not just take the weapons, which would be much faster? And if you're going to leave them, why bother wiping them off, which will take a lot more time?

Seriously, good grief, how can anyone still believe this ridiculous narrative? But it's the ONLY way inmate's story could be true.

<snip> some clever criminals want to blame others for their crimes in order to avoid arrest? It's not MacDonald's fault if the murderers left their weapons behind, or wiped them clean. Mazerolle was a hard cookie, and the others were burly. They were unconcerned about MacDonald waking up. I can't understand why you people can't believe that what MacDonald said happened did happen.

This is from an internet forum in 2005, and it makes sense to me:

Quote:

BTW, I have not written to MacDonald yet but will soon. Just in the past few days I finally located his old prison cellmate from the '80s, Kenny, who now lives here in Las Vegas. Kenny was even more insistent on his belief in MacDonald's innocence than when I spoke to him twice a year or more ago, and said other inmates held the same view regarding MacDonald based on how he acted and what he said regarding his case.

If Gunderson says two and two are four that is not an excuse to discredit him.

talk about THICK-HEADED! Henri is the most ridiculously thick-headed poster since he obviously cannot get it through his thick-head that Allen Mazerolle WAS IN JAIL BEYOND ALL DOUBT ON THE NIGHT OF THE MURDERS AND THEREFORE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED AND THAT EVERY SINGLE SOURCED PIECE OF EVIDENCE POINTS DIRECTLY AT INMATE AS THE SOLE MURDERER.

henri - repeating totally debunked and idiotic claims is NOT doing inmate any favors - you only make inmate look more pathetic and ridiculous and you give all of us the opportunity to point out his guilt more and more strongly.....

Mazerolle forged his jail records to pretend he was in jail on the night of the MacDonald murders, perhaps with help from Murtagh. He did the same thing in a different part of America during the time he was on the run as a fleeing criminal and he never appeared in court on his initial charges until about a year after the murders. That was proved by Detective Beasley, but disregarded by the genius detectives in the Army CID and FBI.

Gunderson became mired in controversy, and discredited, with regard to the child sex rings in America. I can't prove that he got it right, but the truth is now coming out about the pedophile activities of Clinton and Bush. Any mention of the Podesta emails, which include links to Portugal, or pedophile activities in Hollywood, is now heavily censored even on this internet forum and it is now becoming an offense for the mainstream media to report on it.

Mazerolle forged his jail records to pretend he was in jail on the night of the MacDonald murders, perhaps with help from Murtagh. He did the same thing in a different part of America during the time he was on the run as a fleeing criminal and he never appeared in court on his initial charges until about a year after the murders. That was proved by Detective Beasley, but disregarded by the genius detectives in the Army CID and FBI.

Gunderson became mired in controversy, and discredited, with regard to the child sex rings in America. I can't prove that he got it right, but the truth is now coming out about the pedophile activities of Clinton and Bush. Any mention of the Podesta emails, which include links to Portugal, or pedophile activities in Hollywood, is now heavily censored even on this internet forum and it is now becoming an offense for the mainstream media to report on it.

Look down. See that small object?

Thatís the shark.

The above quote is an excellent example of just being wrong on multiple levels.

pfffft pfffft pfffft! OMG that is the most ludicrous statement ever made on a discussion board!

there once was a troll,
that didn't try to be droll,
the comments were crazy,
unsupported and hazy,
the nonsense gets thicker,
and made so much quicker,
that inmate is made a fool,
the troll was also a tool!

It's drivel like this that makes you impossible to take seriously. So now Mazerolle, who couldn't make bail, was given access to the jail records? And the derail into politics and show business? Sure sign you've got nothing but your obsession with mac (which he won't return) to drive you. You'd be funny if a pregnant woman and her two daughters hadn't been mercilessly slaughtered by your man crush.

Mazarolle forged his records?
Look, everyone: Henri rejects our reality and substitutes one of his own!

Well how do you explain all this then Sherlock, from Detective Beasley, apart from trying to discredit him as usual?

Quote:

It is interesting to note that Mazerolle claims he was in jail the night of the MacDonald murders. He claims he can prove this from Superior Court records in Cumberland County. I have been told there is a slip of paper in the court records that shows Mazerolle was in jail the night of 2/16-17/70. These records are available to the public.

[page 7]

I know Mazerolle was not in jail 2/16-17/70 because I arrested him in January 1970 and recall that the trial was set for Mazerolle the day of 2/17/70. If Mazerolle had been in Jail that date (2/16-17/70) he would have been available for trial on 2/17/70, and I would have appeared in court as a witness. John De Carter of the Sheriff's office was with me in the arrest of Rizzo and Mazerolle and he would have also had to appear in court 2/17/70. I specifically recall that I did not appear in court on any case at the Cumberland County Court House on 2/17/70. I was on the street all day looking for suspects on the MacDonald murders.

I don't recall that Mazerolle was out on bail, but I believe he was, or he would have appeared in court 2/17/70. Since he didn't appear I believe he jumped bail, which means a bench warrant would have been issued for him. I recall he was subsequently arrested in Waycross Georgia for burglary, but I have been informed through my sources in law enforcement that the Waycross arrest records are also missing.

I recall that a bondsman, C. B. Avertt, went to Waycross to extradite Mazerolle for jumping bond on my drug arrest. I talked to Avertt in 1979, and he told me that he didn't recall making the bond and had no record. I talked to him a month later and he recalled that he made bond for Mazerolle for $2500.00 after the MacDonald murders, which, according to him, would confirm that Mazerolle was in jail the night of 2/16-17/70. Avertt is either involved in the cover up or is mistaken. Mazerolle's bond could not have been made after the MacDonald murders because the trial was set for 2/17/70, as explained above.

I don't have knowledge concerning the possible altering of Court records concerning the Mazerolle-Rizzo drug arrest, but I recall a number of occasions when Cumberland Court House records were altered after working hours at night. I don't believe Mazerolle was in jail the night of the murders.

Go back and reread the pages of this thread about the unreliability of Gunderson. All sourced, all verified by credible personnel. No need to try and discredit him. He has more that adequately done it to himself.

Go back and reread the pages of this thread about the unreliability of Gunderson. All sourced, all verified by credible personnel. No need to try and discredit him. He has more that adequately done it to himself.

There are people who support Ted Gunderson since his death. You can't just disregard what they say out of hand. Without mentioning the Jeffrey MacDonald case there should have been some routine police work with regard to these matters which Gunderson mentioned:

There are people who support Ted Gunderson since his death. You can't just disregard what they say out of hand. <snip>]

And there are people who support Bigfoot sightings as people seeing an unidentified, uncatalogued species. I can disregard what they say and I can disregard the conspiracy-loving idiot Gunderson's supporters. At one point Gunderson did have credibility. And before that fateful night in February 1970 Jeffrey Macdonald was not a killer. But Gunderson lost his credibility and Mac killed his family.

Well how do you explain all this then Sherlock, from Detective Beasley, apart from trying to discredit him as usual?

(quoting): "It is interesting to note that Mazerolle claims he was in jail the night of the MacDonald murders. He claims he can prove this from Superior Court records in Cumberland County. I have been told there is a slip of paper in the court records that shows Mazerolle was in jail the night of 2/16-17/70. These records are available to the public.

[page 7]

I know Mazerolle was not in jail 2/16-17/70 because I arrested him in January 1970 and {I} recall that the trial was set for Mazerolle the day of 2/17/70. If Mazerolle had been in Jail that date (2/16-17/70) he would have been available for trial on 2/17/70, and I would have appeared in court as a witness. John De Carter of the Sheriff's office was with me in the arrest of Rizzo and Mazerolle and he would have also had to appear in court 2/17/70. I specifically recall that I did not appear in court on any case at the Cumberland County Court House on 2/17/70. I was on the street all day looking for suspects on the MacDonald murders."

So all this is based on nothing more than a recollection AND the suppositions that the trial would have been held as scheduled AND that Detective Beasley would have been called the first day? I can think of a dozen different reasons the trial might have been moved, or Beasley not called at first, and at least one reason why Beasley is simply recalling the court date incorrectly: He's human.

So other than Beasley's recollection and suppositions, what evidence of that trial date do you have?

Can you produce the documentation that the trial was scheduled as Beasley recalls?

The landlord's penchant for focusing on pre-1971 data again rears its ugly head. The landlord studiously ignores the following FACTS.

- In 1974, Beasley was forced to retire after standing in the middle of a busy intersection, waving his arms, and screaming at passing motorists. Beasley was diagnosed with an inorganic brain disorder and it was likely that the symptoms began several years prior to this formal diagnosis.

- In 1984, Beasley admitted at cross (e.g., evidentiary hearing) that the correctional records were at odds with his memory of the Mazzerolle incident.

- In 1991, Beasley admitted to investigative journalist Pat Reese that he no longer believed that Stoeckley was involved in this crime and that Mazzerolle was in jail on 2/17/70. That same year, Beasley sent a note to Freddy Kassab and offered his support.

After the Reese article was printed, Fred Bost visited Beasley and threatened to sue him if he did not recant his statements to Reese. That threat was a hollow one for Bost did not pursue litigation. Bost does not mention this incident in his fictional book on the MacDonald Case.

The landlord's retort to Beasley's post-1970 decline is further proof of his lack of critical thinking skills. Pouting about Beasley's forced retirement due to his mental illness and ignoring Beasley's change of heart is beyond lame.

In terms of the "idiots in the Army CID," who exactly are you referring to? CID Hall of Famer William Ivory? CID Hall of Famer Robert Brisentine? CID Hall of Famer Jack Pruett? Experienced investigators Franz Grebner, Peter Kearns, and Robert Shaw? Hate to break it to ya, but these idiots helped to put your boy in a cell for the past 35 years.

Posts 3383 & 3384 show the difference between mac supporters and those who have faced reality: supporters refuse to countenance anything that detracts from 'factual innocence' - to the degree of believing that law-breakers, law-makers, law-yers, in-laws, judges at multiple levels, the Army, the Federal government, and 12 random people from North Carolina all decided to convict their "hero" for some obscure reason (omitting all evidence against macdonald), while those who face reality don't want the fact that macdonald slaughtered his family to be true have come to terms that what we want isn't always the case and mac did do it.

It's sad, really, because Colette, the unborn son, Kim and Kris died because of mac's losing control and then deciding to cover that up (to save face? to avoid having people know he was a flawed human being like the rest of us?) rather than admit he lost control. It's his pride that has kept him in prison all these years as much as the facts.

The landlord's retort to Beasley's post-1970 decline is further proof of his lack of critical thinking skills. Pouting about Beasley's forced retirement due to his mental illness and ignoring Beasley's change of heart is beyond lame.

In terms of the "idiots in the Army CID," who exactly are you referring to? CID Hall of Famer William Ivory? CID Hall of Famer Robert Brisentine? CID Hall of Famer Jack Pruett? Experienced investigators Franz Grebner, Peter Kearns, and Robert Shaw? Hate to break it to ya, but these idiots helped to put your boy in a cell for the past 35 years.

Beasley suffered from senile dementia, and a possible drink problem, in his later years, and when he was interviewed by that 'person of interest' former drug addict local journalist Pat Reese in about 1991.Beasley's daughter has posted on an internet forum that what her father said about the MacDonald case was true, at least up to the trial in 1979, and in my opinion beyond then. Detective Beasley won two awards for being the best detective in North Carolina early on in his detective career.

As I have said before the so-called detectives in the Army CID should be in the Hall of Infamy not the Hall of Fame. What one policeman says is probably true what two policemen say may be true but what three policemen say is never true.

Later that morning, Fayetteville police detective Prince Beasley heard a description of the intruders and recognized one of them — the female — as Helena Stoeckley, who had a history with drugs and was one of his narcotics informants. Beasley had his dispatch call CID, the Army’s investigative division, to let them know he had one of the suspects.
But no one ever responded, he said.

The landlord's circular logic is akin to a cat chasing its own tail, but unlike a cat's tail, the hippie home invaders in this case are not real. It takes a certain type of mentality to present a cognitive basket full of omissions, fabrications, and grade school insults.

In Beasley's case, he was NOT suffering from an organic brain disorder in his "later years." He was suffering from an inorganic brain disorder in the early 1970's. This little shell game does not enhance the credibility of Beasley's claims in 1970, nor does it magically wipe away the FACT that Beasley was diagnosed with this brain disorder FIVE YEARS prior to the trial.

The fact that Beasley's daughter believes that her father believed in his original (e.g., Stoeckley/Mazzerolle involvement) debunked narrative is utterly irrelevant. It also appears that his daughter took the Fred Bost route and conveniently left out the FACT that in the last 4 years of his life, Beasley no longer believed that the Stoeckley Seven were involved in this mass murder.

The landlord also has no concept of what makes up an organizations Hall of Fame. In essence, a Hall of Fame consists of the best of the best. Several investigators who worked on this case are in the CID's Hall of Fame and several others had distinguished careers in the Army CID. Their collective efforts led to not one, but two massive investigations. Both investigations came to the SAME conclusion. Janice Glisson told me that not one of the CID investigators had doubts about inmate's guilt. Not one.

Heck, even law enforcement officers that were not assigned to either investigation (e.g., Ken Mica) believed in MacDonald's guilt. Those who believe in an Army conspiracy cannot explain why the officer who came forth with the "Woman On The Corner Wearing A Floppy Hat" story believes that inmate is guilty as sin? My favorite Mica quote involves his observation of the living room at 544 Castle Drive. Mica stated, "I've done more damage to my own living room playing with my dog."

In the end, the CID provided the seminal moment of this case. Their 10,000 page report led to inmate facing the music before a Grand Jury and resulted in a slam dunk indictment.

Four years later, inmate was convicted in less than 7 hours and has spent 36 of the past 38 years in prison. Those idiots in the Army CID paved the way for the Ice Pick Baby Killer's 36 year stint in the Big House.

It's sad, really, because Colette, the unborn son, Kim and Kris died because of mac's losing control and then deciding to cover that up (to save face? to avoid having people know he was a flawed human being like the rest of us?) rather than admit he lost control. It's his pride that has kept him in prison all these years as much as the facts.

You are in cloud cuckoo land. Where is the supporting evidence and facts?

This is how Ken Adachi replied to JTF several years ago and I agree with this.
It was poor police work:

Quote:

Hello Brian, (JTF)

Wow, well you might succeed in swaying unknowledgeable people with such bluster and strident bravado, but bluster doesn't turn lies into truth, no matter how many specious paragraphs you might write.

You do NOT know the facts my friend and you obviously don't want to know the facts. You are much more committed to assigning guilt to MacDonald than any casual reader and you'll reach into any grab bag of prevarication that will suit your need to slander MacDonald.

You are on a mission, pal.

Every paragraph you write here is either patently false or perversely twisted from the reality of what actually took place in the circumstances you cite. You are a remarkable conjurer. I did read the court transcripts Brian, and much more closely than you because your statements are nothing more than tripe and full of errors.

Potter and Bost's book is a testament to honest research and true detective work that took TEN YEARS TO COMPLETE while the McGinniss book is a novel from cover to cover and that's why ole Joe had to fork over $325K after the 1986 trial when McDonald's sued him for fraud. MacDonald's team established clear and undeniable fraud, similar to the fraudulent allegations you make here.
You are full of beans Brian.

You picked the wrong guy to try to bowl over with bluster.
"Not a single shred ..." " Enough to get me started." Who do you think you're fooling?

You quote Esquire magazine as if it's a reliable source of information! Give me a break. What a total gas bag you are.

I'll save your little propaganda effort here and post it (and take it apart) when I have the time to attend to such an insipid mockery of the facts.

Beasley was a good and experienced detective, unlike those idiots in the Army CID.

Let's skip the name-calling and cut to the chase. Even as a 'good and experienced detective' (which is an unsupported assertion of yours), he was still nonetheless human, right?

He was still as subject as any one of us to failures of recollection, right?

You avoided my points entirely. Try to respond to the points I make instead of just repeating your own.

Here's my points once more:

Originally Posted by HSienzant

So all this is based on nothing more than a recollection AND the suppositions that the trial would have been held as scheduled AND that Detective Beasley would have been called the first day? I can think of a dozen different reasons the trial might have been moved, or Beasley not called at first, and at least one reason why Beasley is simply recalling the court date incorrectly: He's human.

So other than Beasley's recollection and suppositions, what evidence of that trial date do you have?

Can you produce the documentation that the trial was scheduled as Beasley recalls?

Please produce the evidence that Beasley's recollections and suppositions are correct. Otherwise they are just that: recollections and suppositions, not supported by the evidence, and something we should give little credence to.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee

This is the sort of thing that reminds me of Judge Fox in the MacDonald case on You Tube:

Nobody cares what it reminds you of. 'What does the evidence indicate?' is the coin of the realm here. Your thoughts and feelings don't matter in the least.

Please produce the evidence that Beasley's recollections and suppositions are correct. Otherwise they are just that: recollections and suppositions, not supported by the evidence, and something we should give little credence to.
Hank

Beasley's daughter once posted on the internet that her father knew what happened in the MacDonald case but he was not believed. The problem with all this is that the documentation has vanished, I believe by Murtagh and Blackburn. Mazerolle was due to appear in court at the time of the MacDonald murders but he never did appear. That should raise alarm bells even with amateur lawyers.

By the way, most people in America think JFK was bumped off by the CIA.

This is some hard evidence that Detective Beasley was due to testify in court at the time of the MacDonald murders but he never did, and you can't say that he did :

Mazerolle was actually sentenced about a year after the murders which is very odd. That was 1971, not 1970 when the murders took place :

[quote] (e) A "judgment and commitment" form regarding Allen Patrick Mazerolle indicating that on January 14, 1971, he was found guilty of possession of LSD and was sentenced to three to five years to the care and custody of the Department of Correction. Brinson made available a "true" certified copy of the above document which was actually prepared by (First Name Unknown) S. Smith on October 14, 1981. (attached #8)

DESMIRELLE: Henri is truly a man on an island. The landlord is engaging in his usual assumptions, conspiracy narratives, and true crime fantasies. I'm not the BRIAN who took apart Adachi piece by piece, but I do know the author of that factual butt kicking. Notice how Adachi didn't formulate a single factual rebuttal to BRIAN'S fact-based narrative? I asked BRIAN what the odds where that Adachi would follow-through with his promise to respond to the evidentiary arguments? BRIAN responded, "Slim to none."

I've relied on the same record to deliver my own factual punches to the gut to the following individuals.